
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

oldsmobile-digest         Monday, 26 February 1996      Volume 01 : Number 102


----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Peg O'Connor" <peg@grove.ufl.EDU>
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 23:20:33 -0400
Subject: Re: '88 Cutlass Ciera stalling problem

> A friend of mine has a stalling problem.  When his Ciera is idling at a stop
> light it stalls.  He has taken it to the local olds dealer and they can't
> seem to solve the problem.  He said they replaced everything electrical and
> that didn't work.  Then they tried disconnecting the transmission solenoid.
>  That didn't work.  Someone suggested replacing the mass air flow sensor or
> an 02 sensor but he said that he had done that within the last year.

Has the dealer tried something simple like vacuum pump?  Of course not;
that'd be too easy . . . ;)

------------------------------

From: gludlam@bcinet.net (Gregg Ludlam)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 10:07:14 -0400
Subject: Re: Rally-Pac Update

>> >the oil
>> >pressure gauge DOOOOH! I guess I'll have to send it off and get it fixed.
>>
>> Is that mechanical or electric? There's more diagnosis you might want to
>> do before shipping anything out.
>
>	Its electric. I tested the induction? coils on the back for continuity
>(they looked good) and cleaned them up. The only thing I didn't take apart
was >the actual gauge unit itself (each one; gas,temp,oil is separate).
Trouble is, >even if I could get them all to work, I dont know how accurate
they would be. I >think my best bet is to send them off and get them fixed and
calibrated.

For testing the oil pressure, with the engine running (ie: power to the
Rally-Pac), disconnect the wire to the oil pressure sending unit.  The gauge
should go to its max reading.  Now ground the wire and check the gauge
reading...it should be "0".  If all this works, the gauge is OK...go buy a
$5 sending unit.  If it doesn't, I'd do continuity checks of the harness
between the sending unit and gauge cluster.  Also, check the runs on the
printed circuit board on the back of the cluster.  For temp gauges, the
above technique works with opposite results: grounded, needle pegs; open,
needle at minimum.  BTW, the above technique is from my '67 Service Manual,
and worked in t-shooting the Toro's temp gauge.

>Once again Andrew, thanks for the good advice and quick response! I'll have
to >buy you a beer if your ever down Dallas way.

Ditto...Andy's the Man.  Countless hours were spent by him helping me with
my charging system problem last year when I first signed onto the list.
Another cold one's waiting for year in SE NC, pal!


- -Gregg, the '67 Toro guy

------------------------------

From: gludlam@bcinet.net (Gregg Ludlam)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 10:13:48 -0400
Subject: Re: Sending Unit signal strength

>anybody know what the signal strength in amps is that your oil pressure and
>water temp sending units put out? I would like to use this info to test to
>see if I am getting a signal up to the connection on my guages. If it makes
>a difference the units are off of a 69 442.

The temp sending unit is more like a thermocouple...a variable resistor
who's resistance changes (goes down) as the temperature it's sensing changes
(goes up).  As for the oil pressure sending unit, it's most likely just a
differential pressure sensor who's resistance changes with d/p.  This is
true of the electrical types, but not for the mechanical types - their
change in d/p causes a Bourdon-tube type mechanism to change the position of
a needle.

So to answer your question, it's resistance that changes causing a
corresponding change in voltage/current across the sending unit.  The
net-change results in a needle deflection.  Value?  Maybe a couple-hundred
ohms?  I'm guessing here...


- -Gregg, the '67 Toro guy

------------------------------

From: gludlam@bcinet.net (Gregg Ludlam)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 10:20:56 -0400
Subject: Re: 71 4-dr Olds for sale; what would ....

>>     Ad reads:
>>     '72 OLDS CUTLASS SUPREME
>>     2Dr Hard Top, 350 Rocket, Runs Excelent, 1700 OBO.
>>     (in Portland)
>
>Now see, that's not a ridiculous price, if in fact it is in decent shape
>(what kind of rust would you expect on it?). It is actually a car I would
>want to drive.

Hmmmm, sounds REAL similar to the '72 I've been looking at.  Good to know I
was close on its value...


- -Gregg, the '67 Toro guy

------------------------------

From: gludlam@bcinet.net (Gregg Ludlam)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 10:28:42 -0400
Subject: Re:   '66 Toronado questions?

>Umm..  I just found one car that nice 1966 Toronado in Tennessee, I
>asked a man how much cost that car to sell and the man asked for $4600
>dollars based on the price guide as good condition, however I think
>that car should be $3500 dollars because that car hasn't run for about
>4 years.  and what's more it has 1967 taillights instead of 1966's,
>trunk key locking is missing and paint (gold) is dull also has some
>patches on the rear right corner was just a little dent.

Whew, highway robbery!  What's the odometer reading?  Does it have
cruise/tilt/power windows & seats?  Is it a deluxe or a standard (VIN is
39687... vs. 39487...)?  My experience is that if it's a really nice #3 car
it's worth maybe $4K.  Otherwise, we're talking $1.5K.  I just looked at a
'66 on Thursday that fit your description and the guy was asking $1.5K.  Of
course, I offered him $400 since I'd just pull the options I need out of it
and junk the rest.  Good luck...


- -Gregg, the '67 Toro guy

------------------------------

From: gludlam@bcinet.net (Gregg Ludlam)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 10:32:59 -0400
Subject: Re: (no subject)

>Any one have a dark blue, good looking dash pad (or what ever you call
>'em) that you would like to part with?

And while you're reading that Hemmings, look for an ad from a company called
"Just Dashes".  They'll redo your original in any color you wish...

>I would like to replace or re-chrome my tail light bezels and the long
>chrome piece that is in the center of the hood.

Yikes, be careful...that stuff may be "pot-metal" vs. plated metal.  Having
those pieces redone will cost you an arm and a leg.

>I need the correct material to re-cover my bucket seats.

Dal Allen, a regular on the list knows of an excellant source for
upholstery, out of Oregan?  Hey Dal, you reading this...?!


- -Gregg, the '67 Toro guy

------------------------------

From: "Shawn M. Twomey" <stwom@ctp.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 17:02:14 -0400
Subject: Tranny swap?

>>a Turbo 350.  I see no reason why a fairly strong 350 SB build (275,
     >>maybe 300 HP) should require more than a 200-4R.  Any trans experts
     >>care to comment?

     I think a tranny swap might be in your best interest should you
     upgrade to a 350. I'm no expert on trannys but I've gone through two
     Turbo 350'2 (comparable to the 200 4R??) in my Olds W/ 345 hp '74 Chev
     350(yah, yah I know how y'all feel about cross breeding and all that
     but it's a balanced, blueprinted, ported, polished Corvette 202 heads,
     W/big cam, shaved crank, Dual plane high rise topped by a 750 DP 350).

Your 345 HP sounds like a good deal more than I had in mind.  I'm thinking
that I'll set up the 350 with a torque cam, headers, nice intake, and the
stock QJet (actually, I have a brand new one from an '86 442-the engine ran
less than five mins at the dealership before it seized, so somebody stripped
off all the goodies before getting the block repaired-paid $60 bucks for
it).  I may get the Edelbrock Performer package for the other parts.  I have
no idea about pistons & heads at this point but I'm on the lookout for #5,
6, or 7 heads.  Matched with the right set of pistons, is a 9.0 CR too much
to shoot for?  Anyway, gas mileage be damned, this will be a daily driver
when the weather is nice.  I know of someone near me who has a lot of
experience with 200-R4s, so I suppose I'll just ask him if one of these
trannies can deal with a 350 built as above.

____________________________________________________________________________
Shawn M. Twomey     |  "Work and work and love and sex
stwom@ctp.com       |   Aint you hungry for success success success SUCCESS!
                    |   DOES IT MATTER!?!"                   -Rolling Stones
____________________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

From: "Shawn M. Twomey" <stwom@ctp.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 17:04:30 -0400
Subject: 200-R4 article

>If you need it again I sent the message about the 200-4R article,
>it is the October 1986 Car Craft.

Thanks Brandon.  Did you catch that Tom?

__________________________________________________________________________
Shawn M. Twomey     |  "No!  Try NOT!  Do, or do not.  There is no try."
stwom@ctp.com       |  -Yoda
__________________________________________________________________________

------------------------------

From: buehner@cis.nmclites.edu (buehner)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 17:20:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Gremlins

>Bug #1
>------
>  Scenario 1                       Scenario 2
>  ------------                     ------------
>  Start the wipers                 Turn on windscreen washer
>  Turn off wipers                  Wipers keep wiping *
>  Wipers keep wiping               Damn...
>  Turn on windscreen washer        Stop car
>  Maybe, wipers stop               Turn off ignition
>  Damn...                          Turn on ignition
>  Stop car                         Wipers park
>  Turn off ignition
>  Turn on ignition                 * The wipers should stop and park
>  Wipers park                        automatically after a few swipes.
>

     My '83 did this.  It had some kind of pre-technology style delay module
built into the wiper motor.  I couldn't relate any problems to the temp, but
it did similar things.  There is a blue wire (on mine) going into the motor,
and is seperate from the other two connectors.  I was doing some checks on
everything, and found that by unplugging that wire, the wipers worked fine.
(go figure!)  No idea what that did, but it worked, so I had no desire to
find out.  I assume the module is just screwed up (that happens often, GM
always has had some problems with their delays.  Mid-80's phantom sweep ring
any bells?)  Anyway, now when it's cold, the wipers don't work at times.
Usually after 5 minutes, they work again, also.  I don't know why, I've just
lived with it.  I no longer have to pop the hood to unplug the motor to get
the things to stop, so...



>Bug #2
>------
>Take one 1972 air conditioned A-body convertible....
>
>   Scenario 3
>   ----------
>   Turn on the air when the sun is beating down hard
>   Drive for 5+ minutes with air on
>   Park and turn off car
>   Damn, air not working
>   Turn off ignition, reach for a spare thermal fuse
>   Pop the hood, get fresh laundered shirt grubby changing the fuse

     My '77 Toro did this, too, before I got it.  (I'm assuming, because I
found about ten of those suckers stuffed under seats, etc, all fried, and
three of four in the glove box.  When I got the car, the compressor clutch
had been siezed up, and smoked, so I cannot say much about what really
happened.  I put a different compressor on it, and recharged the system, and
never had a problem with it since.  Perhaps you have too high of a charge,
and overworking the compressor when it gets hot out.  A set of pressure
gauges on the system should give indications of that.  Perhaps the
compressor clutch is just ready to fry, too.  I can't say.  There may be
resistance checks you could do, if you found the right shop manual.
(Usually Mitchell has some inclusive A/C Shop manuals available)  Either
way, I'd say it _IS_ something to worry about, because it's giving you
grief.  A/C is supposed to function, any mechanic that can say otherwise is
obviously not up to speed, and is likely not ASE Certified. (If so, he
shouldn't be...)  Maybe give a local (or some nearby reputable) GM
Dealership, and see if they can give you some more pertinent info.  The
"normal" diagnosis is something I'd expect from a garage whose mechanics
(NOT technicians) lack any or all proper training to be making the
diagnosis.  Most GM dealerships should easily be qualified to give a
straight answer. (Note, I say MOST, my hometown one wouldn't likely know,
either, but the one I'm near now should)


>P.S. For all who's like a beefed up 307, let me know when you figure out how
>to get some torque out of the damned thing.

     If you check out my homepage, and snoop around a bit (I think it's
under my "dreams" page, I'm not sure offhand) you can see an '83 H/O that
says Jack McCormack on the side, doing a bigtime burnout.  I have another
pic in front of me (a smaller b/w, it's not on the page anywhere) that shows
the same car with about two inches of daylight under the left front tire.
He's running a 307.  I'm not sure what all he did, but it worked,
apparantly.  I personally would find a much more direct approach to beefing
it up.  First you need some block modifications, you know, on the bottom
where it says 5.0L, maybe make it say 350 or 403, or even 455.  All three
worked for me (I started with a 260, tho.)
                   |
           ________|________
          {        |        } Charley Buehner
          {        |        } "Rockit 1"
          {        |        } buehner@cis.nmclites.edu
          {        |        } http://www.nmclites.edu/~buehner
          {        |        }
          {        |        }
          {        |        }
          {        |        }
          {       /|\       }   "There's no replacement
          {     /  |  \     }        for displacement..."
          {   /    |    \   }
          { /      |      \ }
          {       ]|[       }
          {       ]|[       }
          {       ]^[       }
          {       ]^[       }
          """"""""]^[""""""""
                   ^
                   ^

------------------------------

From: eric_buckner@non-hp-om.cv.hp.com
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 17:46:01 -0400
Subject: RE:Tranny swap?

Item Subject: cc:Mail Text
     >>Matched with the right set of pistons, is a 9.0 CR too much to shoot
     >>for?

     I've got a 66 cc (strip heads+pistons)combustion chamber which pushes
     me up to about 11.5 CR. I think standard is around 79cc which makes
     7.5/8 CR???  So you may just want to go with the stronger head and a
     good set of mildly beefed pistons. I'd think that would put you in the
     middle there. Don't forget to get some good head gaskets (felpro) if
     you up you CR using cheapo ones could be fatal.
      What year is your block?? I have heard the older ones (pre-71?) are
     more susceptible to higher CR's *anyone else*.
     Do you know how the 200-4R compares to the TH350 (got a little *&^$
     for talking bad about Olds equip)?? Hope this helps.Good luck!!!!
     Eric Buckner
     '64 F-85 deluxe
     Albany, OR

     BTW...picked up the Hot Rod? "engines annual edition" that has a
     pretty good overview of an 800$ performance 350 [Chevy;)]rebuild that
     ended up giving just over 300 HP when finished. I don't really know
     how  Olds and Chev 350's compare(parts compatibility) but it gives a
     pretty good idea of what kind of performance a guy can get with less
     than a grand.

------------------------------

From: buehner@cis.nmclites.edu (buehner)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 17:51:00 -0400
Subject: Re: Rally-Pac Update

>>I also
>>tested the TIC TOC TACH out. The tach worked great but not the clock.

     The problem mine has involves the electrical points on the inside of
the clock.  If I recall, once the gauge is out of the dash, it isn't too
tough to get to the guts of the clock.  There is a set of points in there
that operate a relay to keep the clock going and wound up.  The points
contact, the relay kicks in, and pushes the movable point arm up about 3/4
of an inch or so against spring pressure.  At this position, the clock is
"wound" and slowly winds down (you can hear it ticking) until it gets to the
end of the spring travel, at which point (Doooh! bad pun!) The contacts
close and re-energize the relay, which provides perpetual motion for the
clock.  My points were rough.  I filed them (with a point file, logically)
and bent the arm a bit to make contact a little easier.  It worked for a day
or two, then died again.  If I tap the face of the guage, the clock will
start working again for a couple minutes, then quit as soon as it tries to
hit the relay points again.
     Does any of this sound familiar?  If tapping the gauge can get it to
work, than maybe you can save yours.  (I'm sure if I fought with it enough,
mine would work right too, but that'll wait.  I have a clock on the stereo,
so...)

>Try our shade-tree clock solution of fogging a brief squirt of WD-40
>(without the extension tube) through the backlighting holes in the back
>of the clock case.
>
>>Stupid question here: when I had the tack hooked up under the hood and
>>went to ground it, it would shock me. I finally had to get an insulated
>>screwdriver to hold it down. Is this to be expected?

I'm guessing you're referring to grounding the case, not the tach lead
hookup.  I suppose it's possible, I've never tried that.  You've seen the
sparks and current flow evidence on the points in the distributor, that same
primary current is flowing through the case of the tach as well, I suppose.
I guess it depends on how it shocks you, too (You know, a slight buzzing,
vs. your eyes glowing green and hair on fire...)  If it is extreme, maybe
the condensor is fuzzing out on you in the distributor.  Do you go through
points often?
Just a thought.



>Not in my experience. Perhaps the coil is cracked. You were sticking the
>wire on one of the side terminals, right? And there were no stray strands
>getting too close to the center terminal? You might want to clean the top
>of the coil and check for hairline cracks, or for deteriorated coil wire
>insulation. It sounds like some of the firing charge is leaking through
>insulation somewhere, and your tach wire is a convenient ground for it.
>
                   |
           ________|________
          {        |        } Charley Buehner
          {        |        } "Rockit 1"
          {        |        } buehner@cis.nmclites.edu
          {        |        } http://www.nmclites.edu/~buehner
          {        |        }
          {        |        }
          {        |        }
          {        |        }
          {       /|\       }   "There's no replacement
          {     /  |  \     }        for displacement..."
          {   /    |    \   }
          { /      |      \ }
          {       ]|[       }
          {       ]|[       }
          {       ]^[       }
          {       ]^[       }
          """"""""]^[""""""""
                   ^
                   ^

------------------------------

From: buehner@cis.nmclites.edu (buehner)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 18:19:00 -0400
Subject: Re: HO 307

>Hmm.  The reason I didn't think it was standard was that I saw an H/O add
>scanned in by Charlie Beuhner on his web page that mentions all the optional
>engine equipment and their part numbers.  The intake was in that list,
>although it said something like "part number not available at this time."
>Charlie?  Anyone?

     Haven't seen any updates about that yet.  If they're still around
(anyone know?) you could try Precisioned Speed out of Anaheim at (714)
635-3100.  (That number is from 1984, so I've no idea what you'll find
there.)  They used to provide specialty Olds stuff, no idea if it's their
own, or OEM.

   If you're not set on a 307, I'd also recommend a 350.  Much as I like
>     my 307 HO, I think a 350 would be a far cry better.  Emissions laws or
>     the onboard computer may force you to keep the 307 however.
>
>     Yup, the H/O's and 442's aren't all that fast.  But they are tons of
>     fun to drive.  Beat a 5.0 mustang (mmm... smoked pony!) off the line
>     yesterday.  He caught up within a block, but by that time I didn't
>     want to go any faster anyways (another block or so and he'd be blowing
>     my doors off, but I didn't let him know that :-) ).

     Yeah, that's one problem with the Hurst's and 442's.  Ya'd feel guilty
pulling out the right engine and stuffing in a good one.  My Cutlass is one
of the dime a dozen types, so I can Hack and Cut and not even care!  With
the 455, I don't need to worry about very many "Five Point Slows!"  I do so
love the smell of burnt horse meat!   :)


>*grin*  One problem I have with my '85 442 is that its performance seems to
>suffer a LOT when there are more people in the car.  I realize that the
>extra weight will affect it some, but if I get four people in my car, I
>might as well forget it-smoking the tires (no posi) becomes just about
>impossible.
>
>     Even with the
>     overdrive, the 3.73 gears send your gas mileage right out the window.
>     Anyone with one of these cars want to share numbers?  I'm getting
>     13-14 in town, 18-19 highway.  This is on oxygenated gas and probably
>     will improve when real gas becomes available the end of the month.
>
>My car is NOT environment friendly. :)  These figures sound about what I'm
>getting.  Of course, much worse if I'm on it all the time (I consider it a
>minor miracle that there are no points on my license).
>
>__________________________________________________________________________
>Shawn M. Twomey     |  "No!  Try NOT!  Do, or do not.  There is no try."
>stwom@ctp.com       |  -Yoda
>__________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>
                   |
           ________|________
          {        |        } Charley Buehner
          {        |        } "Rockit 1"
          {        |        } buehner@cis.nmclites.edu
          {        |        } http://www.nmclites.edu/~buehner
          {        |        }
          {        |        }
          {        |        }
          {        |        }
          {       /|\       }   "There's no replacement
          {     /  |  \     }        for displacement..."
          {   /    |    \   }
          { /      |      \ }
          {       ]|[       }
          {       ]|[       }
          {       ]^[       }
          {       ]^[       }
          """"""""]^[""""""""
                   ^
                   ^

------------------------------

From: buehner@cis.nmclites.edu (buehner)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 18:25:00 -0400
Subject: Re: '88 Cutlass Ciera stalling problem

>A friend of mine has a stalling problem.  When his Ciera is idling at a stop
>light it stalls.  He has taken it to the local olds dealer and they can't
>seem to solve the problem.  He said they replaced everything electrical and
>that didn't work.  Then they tried disconnecting the transmission solenoid.
> That didn't work.  Someone suggested replacing the mass air flow sensor or
>an 02 sensor but he said that he had done that within the last year.
>
>Knowing that I was on the internet he asked me to see if any of my friends
>out there could come up with suggestions on what to try next.     Any ideas?
> Thanks for your help.

     Anytime I hear of tech's playing the parts swapping game, I cringe.
I'd guess you're in over $500 by now, and still no fixes.  I hope they
didn't try to stick you for the full bill there.  I had a problem with my
dealer in '89 after I got my '81.  It would hesitate on acceleration.  They
replaced half of the computer system and stuck me for over $900 by the time
all was said and done.  This gave me much of the drive I had for going to
school and learning about automotive electronics.  I finally cured the
problem in '91 myself.  I put a new accelerator pump on, and never had the
problem again.  (Then a 350, then a 403, then a 455, and I still don't have
the problem.)
     What I'd do as a tech is run a good scan tool and do a snapshot as soon
as it stalls out.  This should give ample information about what all the
sensors are doing/seeing.  Does your check engine light come on?
                   |
           ________|________
          {        |        } Charley Buehner
          {        |        } "Rockit 1"
          {        |        } buehner@cis.nmclites.edu
          {        |        } http://www.nmclites.edu/~buehner
          {        |        }
          {        |        }
          {        |        }
          {        |        }
          {       /|\       }   "There's no replacement
          {     /  |  \     }        for displacement..."
          {   /    |    \   }
          { /      |      \ }
          {       ]|[       }
          {       ]|[       }
          {       ]^[       }
          {       ]^[       }
          """"""""]^[""""""""
                   ^
                   ^

------------------------------

From: urbanch@magi.com (Chris Urban)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 18:48:37 -0400
Subject: Re: TH700-R4 4-speed automatic

I've been looking for that. Thanks . Any more info you can give on this?

>Lo and behold, while waiting to get my wifes 1991 Olds 88 repaired,
>reading a recent copy
>of Hot Rod, a article about a EXTENSION HOUSING direct from GM to fit
>TH700-R4's in 68-72
>GM A-body cars...
>
>Those of you interested, the GM part number is 8673406.
>
>

>

------------------------------

From: urbanch@magi.com (Chris Urban)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 18:51:14 -0400
Subject: Re: 200-R4 article

Shawn any chance of getting another copy of that article?


>>If you need it again I sent the message about the 200-4R article,
>>it is the October 1986 Car Craft.
>
>Thanks Brandon.  Did you catch that Tom?
>
>__________________________________________________________________________
>Shawn M. Twomey     |  "No!  Try NOT!  Do, or do not.  There is no try."
>stwom@ctp.com       |  -Yoda
>__________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>

------------------------------

From: urbanch@magi.com (Chris Urban)
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 18:59:29 -0400
Subject: Re: Tranny swap?

Shawn I have tried a ton of th350 and I'd like to say that this is one good
tranny. They do blow up with mis-use and with age but when fresh and
properly built by an experienced tranny person they will take a beating,
more so than a 200R. I realize the 200R is  a modern OD tranny that will
work on the street well which is why I like them along with any OD tranny.
For your particular application it should work well as long as you stay
under 350hp.


>>>a Turbo 350.  I see no reason why a fairly strong 350 SB build (275,
>     >>maybe 300 HP) should require more than a 200-4R.  Any trans experts
>     >>care to comment?
>
>     I think a tranny swap might be in your best interest should you
>     upgrade to a 350. I'm no expert on trannys but I've gone through two
>     Turbo 350'2 (comparable to the 200 4R??) in my Olds W/ 345 hp '74 Chev
>     350(yah, yah I know how y'all feel about cross breeding and all that
>     but it's a balanced, blueprinted, ported, polished Corvette 202 heads,
>     W/big cam, shaved crank, Dual plane high rise topped by a 750 DP 350).
>
>Your 345 HP sounds like a good deal more than I had in mind.  I'm thinking
>that I'll set up the 350 with a torque cam, headers, nice intake, and the
>stock QJet (actually, I have a brand new one from an '86 442-the engine ran
>less than five mins at the dealership before it seized, so somebody stripped
>off all the goodies before getting the block repaired-paid $60 bucks for
>it).  I may get the Edelbrock Performer package for the other parts.  I have
>no idea about pistons & heads at this point but I'm on the lookout for #5,
>6, or 7 heads.  Matched with the right set of pistons, is a 9.0 CR too much
>to shoot for?  Anyway, gas mileage be damned, this will be a daily driver
>when the weather is nice.  I know of someone near me who has a lot of
>experience with 200-R4s, so I suppose I'll just ask him if one of these
>trannies can deal with a 350 built as above.
>
>____________________________________________________________________________
>Shawn M. Twomey     |  "Work and work and love and sex
>stwom@ctp.com       |   Aint you hungry for success success success SUCCESS!
>                    |   DOES IT MATTER!?!"                   -Rolling Stones
>____________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>

------------------------------

From: Dave Voorhis <dave@armchair.mb.ca>
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 19:44:39 -0400
Subject: Re:   '66 Toronado questions?

At 10:28 AM 25/02/96 -0400, you wrote:

>  I just looked at a
>'66 on Thursday that fit your description and the guy was asking $1.5K.  Of
>course, I offered him $400 since I'd just pull the options I need out of it
>and junk the rest.  Good luck...

About five years ago, I looked at a '66 that had been sitting in a farmer's
field for three years.  The farmer wanted $1500, I offered him $500.  He
laughed, I laughed, we laughed, and then I left.  A few months later, the
farmer phoned me and said the car was mine if I still had the $500.

So I bought the car.  I intended to strip it for spares for my '67 Toro, but
decided to try starting it first, just to see what would burn or explode --
fully expecting the engine to be completely seized or worn to uselessness.
You don't stick a car in a field 'cause its running perfectly, right?

So I plopped in a battery, and hooked up a spare ignition switch.  Oh, did I
tell you the farmer didn't have the keys?  The car belonged to a relative,
apparently, and the farmer legally claimed it after the relative failed to
pay a debt, refused to retrieve the car from the field, and then moved to
Nova Scotia or some other distant place.  Anyway, I turned it over.  And it
started.  On three year old gas.  And it ran.  Admittedly, it didn't idle
very well, but it ran well enough that I bothered to put fresh gas and oil
in it, put plates on it, and drove it regularily for a couple of weeks.

Because it didn't have keys, I wasn't able to open the trunk until it
started.  In the trunk I found a pair of ice skates in my size, several bags
of golf tees, and a brand-new (well, three-year-old brand new) spare tire.
Bonus.  Well, almost -- I hate golf.

Then the fuel line developed a crack, and the brakes failed, and the
headlight vacuum motors turned out to be water damaged.  I haven't had time
to do anything with it since.  It's sitting in the back yard, keeping grass
dead until I find time to restore it.

BTW, $500 was probably too much.  I paid $750 for my '67 Toro over ten years
ago.  At that time it ran perfectly, had a perfect interior and no rust, but
had a slightly damaged hood and perforated exhaust system.

Dave, the other '67 Toro guy
dave@armchair.mb.ca
http://www.armchair.mb.ca/~dave

------------------------------

From: Roger Saladin <rsaladin@bright.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 22:04:21 -0400
Subject: Re:   '66 Toronado questions?

At 07:20 PM 2/24/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Umm..  I just found one car that nice 1966 Toronado in Tennessee, I
>asked a man how much cost that car to sell and the man asked for $4600
>dollars based on the price guide as good condition, however I think
>that car should be $3500 dollars because that car hasn't run for about
>4 years.  and what's more it has 1967 taillights instead of 1966's,
>trunk key locking is missing and paint (gold) is dull also has some
>patches on the rear right corner was just a little dent. I need our
>feedback before I will decide to buy one with trade my 1952 Olds.
>Thanks PMRjr  owner of 1952 Rocket Olds Super 88 and 1967 Olds Cutlass
>Supreme...
>
Hmmm....  Old Cars Price Guide (I assume that's what he's referring to)
lists a '66 Toro in "good" - aka #4 condition as $2200 or $2300, it
depends on whether is't a sport or custom. A #3, or "very good", shows
$4400/4600 for the same two. The difference, as quoted from the price
guide, is that the #3 is a "'20 footer.' That is, from 20 feet away it
may look perfect." The #4 car is a driver, even at 20 feet it shows the
need for quite a bit of work to be in showroom condition. As for the
one you're looking at, is the need for a paint job, the patches on the
rear, and so on visible from 20 feet?


>

------------------------------

From: Bob0Barry@aol.com
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1996 01:09:09 -0400
Subject: Re: How much is my '68 Olds worth?

In a message dated 96-02-24 18:37:27 EST, you write:

>On Sat, 24 Feb 1996 Bob0Barry@aol.com wrote:
>> There is a difference between the value of the car and the price you can
>get
>> someone to reasonably pay for it. For me, the prospect of driving a
perfect
>> condition older car like yours, which has no special options and is quite
>> ordinary, would be weighed against driving a nice condition car with more
>> options or a 2-door version, which would be weighed against driving a
>ratty,
>> but more desireable version of the same car (442, convertible). Of those
>> three options, driving a ratty 442 sound most appealing, and I suspect you
>> can get one of those for around $1500 or so. The second most appealing
>option
>> would be a nice condition but ordinary 2-dr, for which I'd pay maybe
$1000.
>> The least appealing is a perfect condition 4-dr; I wouldn't pay more than
>> $800 or so for the pleasure of driving the car, since the first two
options
>> are available.
>
>Bob, with all due respect, I think you're dreaming. You might be able to
>get condition #5 4-4-2s for your $1,500 but I'd doubt they'd be driveable
>for long. As for a "good condition" 2-dr for $1,000, all I can say is
>that your definition of good condition must be a lot different than mine.

You're probably right as far as my definition of "good condition" goes; I've
come to settle for "able to pass inspection with a couple square yards of
sheet aluminum and some pop rivets". Bad condition involves major crunched
panels, bent or rusted-through frame, missing glass, engine or vital
suspension components, etc.. If the floors are 95% there, the frame is solid,
the engine still runs, and some minor patching will get past inspection, then
I'd consider the purchase.

>Realistically, around here *nothing* in the classifieds sells for less
>than $1,000... I mean, not even winter beater '84 Chevettes. To expect to
>find a late 60s or early 70s Cutlass in what I'd consider good condition
>you'd be looking at many thousands more.

Well, just from the most recent Bargain News I have lying around (Nov. '95; I
can't stand window shopping when cars like this are out there), there are the
following cars, which I would consider as falling in the "interesting"
category (limited edition, convt):

* 68 Riviera GS, 445ci, air, auto, bench, $950

* 69 Riviera GS, needs minor work, spare car, asking $950

* 72 Eldorado Convertible, fair cond., runs exc. needs work $750obo

* 73 Delta 88 Convert, fair cond, $950

* 68 Grand Prix, 1 owner, green/black leather, 43,500 orig. mi, 400ci, needs
body work, $1500

* 65 Impala SS convert, for restoration, $700

And in the "nice" category (2dr, luxury models, etc.):

* 64 Thunderbird, 390ci, ps, pb, runs good, needs restoration, $475

* 72 Monte Carlo, 350, auto 2 new quarters, runs, $250

* 72 Cutlass Supreme, rblt trans, buckets, console, fact. duals, asking $950

* 69 Catalina 2-dr, 400 eng&trans, black int, needs exhst, 25,000 orig mi,
$1500

And in the ordinary but old category:

* 65 Buick Electra, 4dr, black leather interior, Wildcat 445 engine, orig.
owner, $400

* 67 Buick Electra 225 orig 4dr incredible 27,000 orig. mi, asking $995

* 65 Impala SS, solid body and frame, 93k mi, $1500 neg.

(I should note that these are the exceptions; there are people asking
absolutely ridculous prices for equivalent cars (70 Cutlass 350/2bbl $3500 |
68 Tempest GTO lookalike, 350, $5000neg.)

>And geez, you could part out a
>perfect condition 4-door for a lot more than $800. The car is worth a lot
>more than that because of the uniqueness alone. Someone out there would
>pay a few thou for it, as you say later.

You're absolutely right. The above list is simply a number of cars that I
would like to drive as much as I would like to drive a showroom condition '68
Cutlass 4-dr; hence, the above prices give an idea of what that car would be
"worth" to me.

For someone with different priorities, however, the car would be "worth"
something much closer to its value. I don't mind patching up some rust,
especially if it has a big engine or the top goes down. For someone who
doesn't like to do anything but wash and wax an older family-type car, the
'68 Cutlass would be worth much more (comparable, say, to the price of an '89
Honda Accord, or a '90 Ford Taurus).

I was surprised, however, at just how many low mileage cars (<50,000 miles)
from the sixties there are still out there for less than $1500. I personally
owned a 17,000mi 1960 (!) Pontiac Catalina that I bought for $1500 in 1986.
So the price the owner of the showroom condition '68 Cutlass could expect
should be in the $2000-$3000 range, but he should still expect to wait a
while to find the right buyer. If he wants to sell right away, he'll probably
have to settle for less than $2000.

>> Of course, this would be different if your car had the highway cruiser
>option
>> (they did offer the 2-bbl 400 in '68, didn't they?), full power, a/c,
Super
>> Stock wheels, etc.
>
>I think the only 400 in '68 aside from the 4-4-2 was in the Vista
>Cruiser. Don't think you could get one in a regular Cutlass, but stand to
>be corrected.
>
>Greg Beaulieu        ab348@ccn.cs.dal.ca        Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

They had the Turnpike Cruiser option in 1967 (well, the Oct. 1966 Motor Trend
article "Driving the Hot '67's" lists the Cutlass Supreme with this option;
reprinted in Brookland Books' "Oldsmobile Muscle Cars, 1964-1971", p. 29.),
and continued in the same spirit in 1970 with the Cutlass Supreme SX. I don't
know for certain if the 400ci motor did make it into any Cutlass Supreme's of
the '68-'69 vintage, though; anyone have the facts or the factory manuals on
this? I'd like to know myself.

And was the 400ci motor in the Vista Cruiser a 2bbl or 4bbl? Was the Vista
Cruiser considered a Cutlass, a Cutlass Supreme, or its own model line? Did
Olds offer the 400ci motor in anything other than the Cutlass line? I was
always under the impression the only reason for the 400 was to comply with
GM's 400ci limit in A-bodies rule.

Bob Barry
1970 Cutlass Supreme SX
Bob0Barry@AOL.Com

------------------------------

End of oldsmobile-digest V1 #102
********************************
